Tennis Forum banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
For the last several years, I much prefered women's tour to men's. However, the end of the 2001 season is different. I find the race for the few final spots in the season-ending tournament in Sydney very exciting down to the wire.

What about WTA? I hate to admit it but the season's ending is downright boring with the field decimated by lame excuse-withdrawals of the main cast. The lucky substitutes lack the star power that could attract the average tennis fan. If the WTA does not implement some changes the next season, the popularity it has enjoyed the last few years may disappear rather quickly.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
181,840 Posts
Hey Lelu , so you finally discovered this board. Welcome !!!!!!!!

<br /> The race to Sydney is getting exciting , but its been mentioned alot more in the media.<br /> I just hope either Marat Safin or Tommy Haas can make it.

The Race to Munich was hardly ever in the press.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,989 Posts
Now whos fault is that, that Munich wasn't that much in the press?? Guess it really has to do that quite a few of the top players aren't showing up. Some were known for a long time (like Monica) some just had bad luck (like Martina) some just withdrew short before (as Venus did) and with some you couldn't be sure if they really would show up (yes I'm talking about Serena). This way it really isn't easy to promote Munich as THE year end spectacle.

At the other hand you have the ATP where only 8 players are alowed to take part at the years end countdown. And with Goran beeing the Wimbledon champ there are only 7 spots left. And the battle around that spot is pretty close, that's what made the way to Sydney so much interresting than the way to Munich.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Thanks, Eggy!

The race to Sydney has been covered more by the media because it simply is more exciting. Could it be that the ATP ranking system after all the criticism it received on our boards is better than that used by WTA? Could it be that the the ATP championship tournament is more appealing than the WTA one?

I, personally, find the format of the ATP tournament much more interesting with the top 8 players playing round robin matches in two groups - more like a soccer world cup format. It is refreshingly different from tournaments played all season long and has a much better chance of determining who the number 1 player in the world really is. Plus, you can be sure that the players who qualify for such a prestigious field will not look for excuses to withdraw from the tournament.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
Oh Please

This is so much shat! Let's see, I don't think Agassi or Rafter will be there and who else? I mean if Safin shows will he compete?

Lelu the web address is atptour.com. They have a live chat and board, we'll miss u.

[ October 30, 2001: Message edited by: n2sWmS ]</p>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
653 Posts
Hey n2sWmS speak for yourself. Why post a thread about the ATP here on the wtaworld.com? It makes no sense. I think the mens tour is sooooo boring. If I see just one more Sampras v. Agassi match I'm gonna topple my television. I think their whole two ranking system system is stupid. I think the WTA is better with much more interesting players. I'd even perfer to watch Conchita play Tauziat that Sampras v. Agassi, and thats sayin somethin.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
Of course the Champions Race is exciting now. That's not the problem. The problem is that the Race is the ranking for the whole year, but only now it is becoming exciting and is getting some substance. Really, who cares who is no. 1 in the Race during March ???

Who not have both ? A 52-week-ranking which is exciting the whole year, and a race which becomes exciting towards the end of the year. Then you have to promote the 52 week-ranking until October and both rankings until the end of the year, while always explaining the difference.

Basically, the women could have that. They have the 52 week-ranking and the race. So what's the problem ? I think there are 3 huge problems:

1. The system. I think men's system is more exciting. Round robin with 8 players, all the top-players play at least 3 times. Imagine that for the women: Martina, Lindsay, Serena and Kim (for example) in a group !!!<br />And the race is more exciting as well. When there are only 8 players, the excitement who will make it is bigger. Not too many people care if Tulyaganova or Schett will play. Also, when there were withdrawals, I sometimes had the feeling that players got a spot who didn't really deserved it for their year.

2. The withdrawals. For almost all male players it's no question that they will play. The women: sorry to say that, but the Williams' are the biggest problems. Every there is doubt if they will play; this and the late withdrawals belittle the value of the tournament which should be seen as a 5th Grand Slam. It's just that Venus is one of the best 3 players in the world, she just should be there.

3. The marketing - the biggest problem. <br />ATP - the 'advantage' of only having a race is that also idiots know who is in a spot to qualify (still, 52 week-ranking is better). So IF you have both, a ranking and a race, you have to publish both and explain the difference. That would also be helpful to explain the ranking itself. You can always see how much points of this year and how much points of last year are included.<br />But the WTA does NOTHING about it. Confusion everywhere. It took me a long time to understand the ranking details, but only with the help of sites like Jannak's, not the WTA. And the ranking and the race are not too difficult to explain it to the average fan. But they don't do it.<br />I have read tons of articles in the past years including errors about ranking positions etc.<br />For example after Luxembourg: Anna K. still has a chance to reach the Championships (of course NOT, the author mixed up rankings and race).<br />Or 'Jennifer can't become no. 1 after losing to Sandrine Testud' in Filderstadt'. She still did it. The WTA didn't inform properly, while WE (on the board) knew all the possibilities that could happen.<br />Or all the bad articles about Martina still being no .1. Has anyone seen the WTA defending and explaining the ranking system ???<br />Of course the writers could inform themselves better, and they want to cause trouble and conflicts. But it's easy to do that when no one stands up and protests.

WTA's marketing, including the horrible website, is REALLY bad. They have to be careful. The players are one thing; but if the system they play in is so bad, the success could be gone soon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
I have to agree with lelu, the atp championship is far way more interesting than the WTA, besides i do think that Rafter & Agassi will play Sidney, & i would rather see Blake vs Santoro than watch the old dirty ladies like Tauziat & Martinez
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
Go<br />Perhaps you could explain to the wta how it should have gone about defending a system inwhich it's best player has not won, not even one, of it's biggest tournaments for well over two years. <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> ...and the hits just keep on coming!

Oh! and Venus should only be there if she's healthy. Germany should have been held responsible for it's mishandling of the event with Monica, not rewarded thereby eliminated your best ambassador, not to mention, one of the hottest on tour at the moment. Not u understand that I'm complaining about this event. It's exciting to me even though I do agree with you that it would be better with only the top 8 and in round robbin format!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
We have had tons of ranking discussions here for the last few weeks. I'm tired of it. If you are interested in them, please go and search.<br />PLEASE: There is more on the tour than just the slams. You think 2 slams are better than, let's say, 8 tier I and II-wins ? Then you are very wrong.

Feel free to post a ranking system here which would not have Martina as no. 1 for most of the year. Others have tried it, and it didn't work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,063 Posts
GoDominique said it all - there are VERY interesting I can fully support, especially those about wrong infos on Kournikova and Capriati´s no1

What really dissapoints me in a interesting discussion on Round Robin as a change f.e. is the fact of this implicit feeling that I have to talk this event down

Most of the year, this event was talked down due to its move to Germany

I´ve the impression that sometimes people think that Venus´ injury (?) would have healed better if playing in the US and with Monica IN everything would have been fine

I wonder if in the next days anyone mentions the fact that there were lots of free seats to argue that this is the same picture of a Championships we had last year in MSG so why did we move ?!

I know that we miss the 3 withdrawals, I know it´s the first time, I know top8-Round-Robin would´ve been better, but can´t we just make the best out of it ?

Tennis is NOT only just about stardom and just the high-profile players ; that is said with regard to Conchita or Tauziat ; I´ve to say that I don´t like Conchita, Nathalie or Arantxa style-wise but mentioning them not interesting for the season-final is disrespectful ´cause I wonder what happens to Davenport or anyone in a couple of years then

The problem is the system and the marketing, it would be the same everywhere

You know, girls are divas, if they wanna play, they play, if not not ; mentioning the Williams first in this case ; they are the best players but have to live with the scepsis that every withdrawal evokes ; they´ve the image now that they think they bring the WTA money so they can decide when where and under which circumstances
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
Go

This is not a discussion about who should or shouldn't be ranked in whatever order...#1 means nothing in wta land. You might note that I haven't taken part in those discusions because they are tedious! Nor is it about replacing Martina as #1, it was however about your comment re: the wta defending the indefensible.

Um...Yeah?! In my "O"pinion, one slam is more important than 8 tier I'a and II's. Also very relavant is head to head results esp. in slams. <br />As a sports fan to me all other events are only relavant in setting up who is favored to win the slams and championship, much like say the 81 game regular season in the nba, the 100 some odd games hockey and baseball season...all just to establish who is favored to win the big dance! Seems to me you are confusing the side dish and the entree!

I'm really not intrested in a ranking system that debunks Hingis. Just one that reflects who beats whom where and how often...i.e; #1 should be favored to devour the entree and the side dish...that's not to say #1 is invincible just more likely to win than...not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
The problem is the number of rounds the girls play in tier 1, 2 or whatever, if they would play more rounds then it would be fair, but since the field is way too short then a Slam is way important than 3 or 5 tier 1, because top players got an advantage of the first round bye. & Conchita & Tauziat would be one match many would never see(me included) because it would be so boring, it wouldn't have anything interesting.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
So why don't you think more closely about it ?<br />Why don't you try to find out a system which reflects what you think is more important ?

You really think Grand Slams are worth more than 8 tier I and II's ? So you should get about 2000 points for winning one ? Then we can reduce the whole season to 4 events, as it wouldn't be worth to play any other events.

You have to think about what a ranking is. You can't demand something a ranking can't reflect.

And head to heads are also quite useless. OK, Venus beat Jennifer 3 times this year; only on hardcourt. <br />Clay ? In Berlin, Venus lost to Justine so Jennifer didn't have the chance to beat Venus.<br />In Paris, Venus lost in the 1st round. The same situation.<br />Indoors: Jennifer plays, Venus not.

It's easy only to show up on your favourite surface and beat everyone, and then vanish for all the other, less liked surfaces. Venus is often called 'best player right now'. While being injured, without even playing ? How will you know ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
You seem to be way into this. As I said in my post the other events are as important as the regular season games in any other sport. We all, well most of us realize that surface makes very little difference in the women's game. Each player has had and will continue to have bad results on their best and worst surfaces. Hard courts by the way are both Jenny and Venus' favorite surfaces...not that this is about them, or the ranking. It's about the excitement of the year end event.

While I'd rather have 1 slam than 8 of the other two I didn't say it should be 8x's the value. In my "o"pinion the least Slam should be worth at least 2x's the points of a tier I, and since the slams are not all equal...their values should be staggered(actually I think they already are), just not enough. I also believe points should start in January and end in december, again just an opinion. I also don't think the top ten players should get points for anything lower than a tier III. Lower ranked players should gain points for an upset, seeds should lose points for being upset. I realize that my views are...extreme but they are my views. y do u keep bringing individual players into this? Again it's not about them.

[ October 30, 2001: Message edited by: n2sWmS ]</p>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Looking at the number of spectators in Munich, it seems even the tennis fans in Germany share the sentiment that this is a snooze event. I am pretty sure the Masters in Sydney will be sold out.

Wake up, WTA!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,809 Posts
I'm sorry, lelu, but i just don't see all these people everywhere talking excitedly about the ATP tour finals. If 1% of the population even know the finals are upcoming, I'd be very surprised. Generally it is the women tennis players who are household names rather than the men.

Of course the newspapers give mens tennis greater prominence, but they do that for all sports except gymnastics - its tradition. As for the crowds, the Eurosport commentators said that a new event, which the Chase in Germany effectively is, doesn't begin to prove itself until the 2nd or 3rd year.

Actually, I think a Round-Robin style event would suit this better - since it would make the event special, and different from a normal tournament.

I agree with GoDominique that the Champions Race in the ATP only becomes relevant at the end of the year. In three months time who will care who is leader in the Champions Race? The WTa does need to do a better job in projecting the Women's Game though. The web site is slow and often unhelpful. We all know about the boards, and very little is done to publicise and explain the excellent ranking system. <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
 

·
Adrenaline junkie
Joined
·
23,023 Posts
I prefer ATp, but really, looking at Sanex quarterfinals I see 4 good matchups. And looking at Paris Round of 16 matchups I can imagine that ESPN will be in trouble finding a matchup deserving their two hours of airtime. All matchups are simply, err.., low key..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,063 Posts
Could we just stop those conversation on the number of people in the crowd please ?!<br />I cannot stand this Germany-criticism just because of the number of spectators

Apart from the Graf vs. Seles matches in the quarterfinals 99 the matches in MSG weren´t sold out before the semis, right !?!

On a working day, matches right before 6 CET in the evening aren´t that spectacular maybe and we´ll see what this event is all about a) NOT BEFORE a Friday schedule and B) NOT BEFORE it´s second or third year running

I doubt that all of this would work in N.Y. ; I´m disappointed that all of this Germany-criticism re-develops ...
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top